alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 07-15-00012-CR

Mark Hoff

 Appellant

v.

The State of Texas

 Appellee 

§

§

§

§

From the County Court at Law 

 of Navarro County

February 13, 2017

Opinion by Justice Pirtle

Concurring Opinion 

 by Chief Justice Quinn

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion 

 by Justice Campbell

J U D G M E N T

Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated February 13, 2017, it is ordered, 

adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.

Inasmuch as this is an appeal in forma pauperis, no costs beyond those that 

have been paid are adjudged.

It is further ordered that this decision be certified below for observance.

o O o
ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Appeal Chamber)

8 May 2008

Case T-92/07 P

**Jacques Frankin and Others**

**v**

**Commission of the European Communities**

(Appeal – Civil service – Officials and members of the temporary staff – Pension – Transfer of pension rights – Appeal manifestly inadmissible – Appeal manifestly unfounded)

**Appeal:**against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 16 January 2007 in Case F‐3/06 *Frankin and Others* v *Commission* [2007] ECR-SC I-A-1-0000 and II-A-1-0000 seeking the annulment of that judgment.

**Held:**The appeal is dismissed. Mr Jacques Frankin and the 482 other officials and members of the temporary staff of the Commission
whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment are to bear their own costs and the costs incurred by the Commission in
the context of the present instance.

**Summary**

*Appeals – Pleas in law – Error of law relied on not identified – Inadmissibility*

*(Statute of the Court of Justice, Annex I, Art. 11(1); Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 138(1)(c))*

It is clear from Article 11(1) of Annex I to the Statute of the Court of Justice and Article 138(1)(c) of the Rules of Procedure
of the Court of First Instance that an appeal against decisions of the Civil Service Tribunal must indicate precisely the
contested elements of the judgment which the appellant seeks to have set aside and also the legal arguments specifically advanced
in support of the appeal. That requirement is not satisfied by an appeal which, without even including an argument specifically
identifying the error of law allegedly vitiating the judgment under appeal, merely reproduces the pleas in law and arguments
previously submitted to the Civil Service Tribunal. Such an appeal amounts in reality to no more than a request for re-examination
of the application already submitted to the Civil Service Tribunal, which falls outside the jurisdiction of the Court of First
Instance.

(see paras 21-22)

See C‐352/98 P *Bergaderm and Goupil* v *Commission* [2000] ECR I‐5291, paras 34 and 35; C‐345/00 P *FNAB and Others* v *Council* [2001] ECR I‐3811, para. 30; C‐248/99 P *France* v *Monsanto and Commission* [2002] ECR I‐1, para. 68; C‐488/01 P *Martinez* v *Parliament* [2003] ECR I‐13355, para. 40
# C_2020414EN.01001801.xml

| 30.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 414/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 414/18

---

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 3 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság — Hungary) — Crewprint Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága

(Case C-611/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Principles of fiscal neutrality, of effectiveness and of proportionality - Right to VAT deduction - Refusal - Fraud - Proof - Chain of subcontractors)

(2020/C 414/22)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Crewprint Kft.

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága

Operative part of the order

Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read in conjunction with the principles of fiscal neutrality, of effectiveness and of proportionality, must be interpreted as precluding a national practice by which the tax authorities refuse a taxable person the right to deduct input value added tax on the ground that the conduct of that taxable person and of the issuer of the invoices amounts to fraud because, first, their contracts were not necessary for the performance of the economic transactions in question and could be legally classified other than how the parties did so, secondly, that issuer has had recourse, without it being necessary or economically rational, to a chain of subcontractors, some of which did not have the necessary personnel and material resources and, thirdly, that taxable person had personal or organisational links with that issuer as well as with one of those subcontractors. In order to provide a basis for such a refusal, it must be established, other than by assumptions based on pre-established criteria, that that same taxable person actively participated in fraud or that that taxable person knew or should have known that those transactions were connected with fraud committed by the issuer of the invoices, which is for the referring court to ascertain.

---

(1)  OJ C 95, 23.3.2020

---
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 80 (Thursday, April 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 24391]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09925]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 10:00 a.m.-11:00 a.m.

PLACE: Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, 
Maryland.

STATUS: Commission Meeting--Open to the Public.

Matters To Be Considered: Decisional Matter: Section 1110 Certificates 
of Compliance--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
    A live webcast of the Meeting can be viewed at www.cpsc.gov/live.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: April 23, 2013.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-09925 Filed 4-23-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
```
# C_2021028EN.01000401.xml

| 25.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 28/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 18 November 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Atresmedia Corporación de Medios de Comunicación SA v Asociación de Gestión de Derechos Intelectuales (AGEDI), Artistas Intérpretes o Ejecutantes, Sociedad de Gestión de España (AIE)

(Case C-147/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Intellectual property - Rights related to copyright - Directive 92/100/EEC - Article 8(2) - Directive 2006/115/EC - Article 8(2) - Communication to the public of an audiovisual work incorporating a phonogram or a reproduction of a phonogram - Single equitable remuneration)

(2021/C 28/05)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Atresmedia Corporación de Medios de Comunicación SA

Defendants: Asociación de Gestión de Derechos Intelectuales (AGEDI), Artistas e Intérpretes o Ejecutantes, Sociedad de Gestión de España (AIE)

Operative part of the judgment

Article 8(2) of Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property and Article 8(2) of Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property must be interpreted as meaning that the single equitable remuneration referred to in those provisions must not be paid by the user where he or she makes a communication to the public of an audiovisual recording containing the fixation of an audiovisual work in which a phonogram or a reproduction of that phonogram has been incorporated.

---

(1)  OJ C 182, 27.5.2019.

---
# C_2010024EN.01001302.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 November 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Don Bosco Onroerend Goed BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-461/08) (1)

1

(Sixth VAT Directive - Interpretation of Articles 13B(g) and 4(3)(a) - Supply of land occupied by a partly demolished building in place of which a new building is to be constructed - VAT Exemption)

2010/C 24/21

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Don Bosco Onroerend Goed BV

Applicant:

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, The Hague — Interpretation of Article 4(3)(a), read in conjunction with Article 13B(g), of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — Taxation of the supply of a building or part of a building and the adjacent ground prior to its first occupation — Supply of a partially demolished building by reason of its replacement by a new building to be constructed

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13B(g) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, in conjunction with Article 4(3)(a) of the directive must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from value added tax provided for in Article 13B(g) does not cover the supply of land still occupied by a dilapidated building that is to be demolished and replaced by a new building and whose demolition, paid for by the vendor, had already begun before the actual supply took place. For value added tax purposes, such supply and such demolition form a single transaction, given that, taken as a whole, the aim of the transactions was not to supply the existing building and the land it stands on but land that has not been built on, regardless of how far demolition of the old building had progressed at the moment the land was actually supplied.

---

(1)  OJ C 69 of 21.03.2009

1

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announces the following meeting:

*Name and Committee Code:*                     Advisory Committee for International Science and Engineering (#25104).                

*Date and Time:*                     January 11, 2024; 12:00 p.m.-5:30 p.m. (Eastern Time).                

*Place:*                     NSF 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314 (Virtual).                

*Connect to the Virtual Meeting:*                     To attend the virtual meeting participants are required to process the meeting registration via Zoom:                

                    Register in advance for the meeting at the Zoom attendee registration link:                     *https://nsf.zoomgov.com/​webinar/​register/​WN_​wfWGOPM7QS6J2xBeV-lndQ*

                    After registering, you will receive a confirmation email with a unique link to join the meeting. If you have any login questions, please contact Louis Bailey, OISE IT Specialist:                     *oiseitsupport@nsf.gov.*

*Type of Meeting:*                     Open.                

*Contact Person:*                     Street, Christopher, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314; Telephone: 703.292.8568/Email:                     *cstreet@nsf.gov.*

*Purpose of Meeting:*                     To provide advice, recommendations and counsel on major goals and policies pertaining to engineering programs and activities.                

*Agenda:*

 Updates on OISE activities

 2023 OISE COV Report

 OISE's Data Analytics Capabilities

 OISE Program Updates

 Meet with NSF leadership

Dated: December 15, 2023.

Crystal Robinson,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2023-27950 Filed 12-19-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
United States Department of Agriculture

SAVE TIME AND MONEY

USDA Accredited Veterinarians can submit export health certificates and supporting 

documents electronically to USDA through the Veterinary Export Health Certification 

System (VEHCS). USDA can also return documents electronically for any corrections 

or edits. This benefits both owners and veterinarians by avoiding long drives or 

overnight shipping of documents to USDA for endorsement.

USE DIGITAL ENDORSEMENT

If the destination country accepts digital USDA endorsement, the Accredited 

Veterinarian can print the endorsed health certificate from their office as soon

as it is endorsed.

RELY ON YOUR TEAM

By using VEHCS, veterinary clinic staff and brokers 

can assist Accredited Veterinarians in preparing the 

health certificate in VEHCS.

GET HELP WITH THE SYSTEM

A dedicated Help Desk is available to answer

your IT questions.

LEARN AS YOU GO

Both step-by-step guides and self-paced tutorials

are available to help you navigate VEHCS.

USDA APHIS’s Veterinary Export Health Certification System:

The BEST Way to Obtain USDA Endorsement 

for Live Animals and Germplasm!

Ready to get started?

OWNERS AND EXPORTERS:

Tell your USDA Accredited Veterinarian you want to use VEHCS the next time you 

send an animal to another country. If you do not have an Accredited Veterinarian: 

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/pet-travel/find-a-vet

USDA ACCREDITED VETERINARIANS AND SUPPORT STAFF:

1. Visit the VEHCS Help Page: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animalhealth/vehcs-help

2. Sign in to start using VEHCS: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/vehcs

3. Check the destination country’s requirements before getting started on a health certificate:

• Pets: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/pet-travel

• Animals: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animalhealth/animal-exports
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 19, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 87814]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27862]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES


Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules; Meeting of the Judicial 
Conference

AGENCY: Judicial Conference of the United States.

ACTION: Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules; notice of open meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules will hold a meeting 
in a hybrid format with remote attendance options on April 10, 2024 in 
Denver, CO. The meeting is open to the public for observation but not 
participation. An agenda and supporting materials will be posted at 
least 7 days in advance of the meeting at: https://www.uscourts.gov/rules-policies/records-and-archives-rules-committees/agenda-books.

DATES: April 10, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: H. Thomas Byron III, Esq., Chief 
Counsel, Rules Committee Staff, Administrative Office of the U.S. 
Courts, Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One Columbus 
Circle NE, Suite 7-300, Washington, DC 20544, Phone (202) 502-1820, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d381a6bfb6a090bcbebebaa7a7b6b68c80b6b0a1b6a7b2a1aa93b2bcfda6a0b0bca6a1a7a0fdb4bca5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7f2d0a131a0c3c101212160b0b1a1a202c1a1c0d1a0b1e0d063f1e10510a0c1c100a0d0b0c51181009">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Authority: 28 U.S.C. 2073.)

    Dated: December 14, 2023.
Shelly L. Cox,
Management Analyst, Rules Committee Staff.
[FR Doc. 2023-27862 Filed 12-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-55-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 244 (Thursday, December 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 88424-88425]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28063]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

[[Page 88425]]


DATES: Date of required notice: December 21, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 15, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Contract 148 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2024-124, CP2024-130.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-28063 Filed 12-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
# C_2007315EN.01004301.xml

| 22.12.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 315/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 315/43

---

Action brought on 31 October 2007 — Basell Polyolefine v Commission

(Case T-399/07)

(2007/C 315/81)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Basell Polyolefine GmbH (Wesselig, Germany) (represented by: D. Seeliger, E. Wagner and I. Liebach, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the Commission Decision of 23 August 2007; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the Commission Decision of 23 August 2007;

| — | in the alternative, annul the Commission Decision of 23 August 2007 in so far as it also refuses partial access to documents; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul the Commission Decision of 23 August 2007 in so far as it also refuses partial access to documents;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant challenges the Commission Decision of 23 August 2007, by which the Commission refuses its application for access to Commission documents concerning the decision in Case COMP/E-2/37.857 — Organic peroxides.

The applicant alleges, first of all, breach of Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (1). The applicant takes the view that, as a legal person with its seat in a Member State, it has a right to access to Commission documents and that this right under Article 2(3) of Regulation No 1049/2001 is also applicable to the documents requested in the context of a cartel investigation.

1

The applicant also alleges breach of the first and third indents of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, on the ground that no commercial interests that objectively warrant protection would be adversely affected by access to the documents and currently no investigation into the cartel proceedings in question is taking place. Furthermore, it is submitted in this connection that there is an overriding public interest in the disclosure of the documents applied for.

Furthermore the refusal of access to the documents applied for also infringes Article 255 EC. The decision is also in breach of Article 6(2) EU in conjunction with Article 42 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

The applicant also alleges breach of Article 4(6) in conjunction with Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001, on the ground that it at least has a right to partial access to the documents applied for. Finally, these provisions have also been breached on account of the Commission's failure to fulfil its duty to examine every document specifically and individually.

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).

1

---
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                          OF CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER

            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, James M. Seneff, Jr., the Chief Executive Officer of CNL Realty
Corporation,  the  corporate  general  partner of CNL Income Fund VII, Ltd. (the
"Partnership"),  has executed this  certification  in connection with the filing
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission of the Partnership's  Annual Report
on Form  10-K for the  period  ending  December  31,  2003 (the  "Report").  The
undersigned hereby certifies that:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) the  information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.



Date:  March 25, 2004

                                        /s/ James M. Seneff, Jr.
                                        -----------------------------------
                                        Name:  James M. Seneff, Jr.
                                        Title: Chief Executive Officer


                                        A  signed   original  of  this   written
                                        statement  required  by Section  906 has
                                        been  provided  to CNL Income  Fund VII,
                                        Ltd.  and will be retained by CNL Income
                                        Fund  VII,  Ltd.  and  furnished  to the
                                        Securities  and Exchange  Commission  or
                                        its staff upon request.